1. Title, director and release year?
Darwin’s Nightmare, Hupert Sauper, 2004
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The people of Tanzania catch giant fish that millions of people eat, yet they are so poor that they are starving.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
These large fish eat smaller fish, which would take longer to catch and only supply enough food for this town. The large fish are caught so quickly that they will probably run out in this lake eventually. The people get paid so little for fishing that they can’t afford food. The planes take food away and only bring guns, which hurt the people giving the food. This fish is shipped so far away when there is a need for it there.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
There were many scenes showing the children on their own basically all day without their parents who are busy fishing or dead. The children talk about life in terms of surviving, not living. The children fight over very small amounts of food, and are on their own mostly for getting this food. These scenes show just how poor this area is and how driven their citizens are towards making money, even though their one source of income is costing them their lives.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I was not convinced by the talk about guns being brought in by the planes. There were no examples of where these guns are actually going and what is happening there so they are not a big issue for me. The bigger issue is that the planes are not bringing food or any other resources to this area.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I want to learn more about the wars going on in Africa and how the guns coming in on these planes affects that. This would give me a better understanding of all of the bad things happening in this situation.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
I think people who eat this fish on a regular basis would be most affected by this movie. They will hopefully see how much goes into them getting their fish, not just the price tag of it to them. This film will hopefully make people look at sustainability in terms of protecting people, not just the natural environment.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This film may push people to stop exploiting poorer countries, and to stop trade with countries whose leaders are taking advantage of their citizens.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I would have liked to know how the fish were introduced to the lake and what the lake and the community were like before the fish were introduced.
1. Title, director and release year?
Darwin’s Nightmare, Hupert Sauper, 2004
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The people of Tanzania catch giant fish that millions of people eat, yet they are so poor that they are starving.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
These large fish eat smaller fish, which would take longer to catch and only supply enough food for this town. The large fish are caught so quickly that they will probably run out in this lake eventually. The people get paid so little for fishing that they can’t afford food. The planes take food away and only bring guns, which hurt the people giving the food. This fish is shipped so far away when there is a need for it there.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
There were many scenes showing the children on their own basically all day without their parents who are busy fishing or dead. The children talk about life in terms of surviving, not living. The children fight over very small amounts of food, and are on their own mostly for getting this food. These scenes show just how poor this area is and how driven their citizens are towards making money, even though their one source of income is costing them their lives.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I was not convinced by the talk about guns being brought in by the planes. There were no examples of where these guns are actually going and what is happening there so they are not a big issue for me. The bigger issue is that the planes are not bringing food or any other resources to this area.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I want to learn more about the wars going on in Africa and how the guns coming in on these planes affects that. This would give me a better understanding of all of the bad things happening in this situation.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
I think people who eat this fish on a regular basis would be most affected by this movie. They will hopefully see how much goes into them getting their fish, not just the price tag of it to them. This film will hopefully make people look at sustainability in terms of protecting people, not just the natural environment.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This film may push people to stop exploiting poorer countries, and to stop trade with countries whose leaders are taking advantage of their citizens.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I would have liked to know how the fish were introduced to the lake and what the lake and the community were like before the fish were introduced.